Small disruptions can cause great disaster

Primary Menu

Tag virtuals

Many thanks to all those who attended my talk at the Percona Live London 2012 conference!
I did put the location in the last slide, but just in case you missed the last slide (or missed my talk) you can find them here:http://spil.com/perconalondon2012

I did receive a couple of questions afterwards (in the hallways of the conference) that made me realize that I forgot to clear up a couple of things.

First of all the essence of shifting the data ownership of a specific GID towards a specific datacenter and ensuring data consistency also means one Erlang process within that very same datacenter is the owner of that data. This does also mean this Erlang process is the only that can write to the data of this GID. Don’t worry: for every GID there should be a process that is the data owner and Erlang should be able to cope with the enormous scale here.

Second of all the whole purpose of the satellite datacenter (all virtualized) is to have a disposable datacenter while the master datacenter (mostly virtualized, except for storage) is permanent. Imagine that next to the existing presence (master or satellite DC) in one country we also expect big growth due to the launch of a new game we could easily create a new satellite datacenter by getting a couple of machines in the cloud. This way our hybrid cloud can easily be expanded either by virtuals or by datacenters. I thought this was a bit too offtopic but apparently it raised some questions.